A knowledgeable source has it that there is a "tape" (mp3 file
from a small solid state voice-corder designed for the covert
recording of conversations) that has been in the possession of
one of the defendants ("A") in Sloan v. Truong, et al., No. 07
CV8537 (DC). This evidences that another person ("B", I will
not confirm or deny that s(he) is a defendant in this lawsuit)
expressed sure knowledge re the identity of the FSS (naming the
FSS while doing this) and proceeded to admit that (s)he (ie "B")
had been posting via anonymizers to sup****t the work of the FSS.
"A", "B" and the FSS are all different persons.
Other remarks on the "tape" will date it to (long) before Brian
published his re****t. It is actually from late fall 2006.
Is Mr Sloan willing to "pay" for this file? Since Sloan has no
money, that means to drop "A" (and one other, to be specified
by "A", that other being neither "B" nor the FSS) from this and
all future suits on this issue, including the suit brought by
Gordon R. Parker (Ray Gordon) etc and to assist in defending any
lawsuit brought against "A" for providing the "tape" to Sloan.
The contract setting forth these terms will be do***ented in
writing
The quality of the recording is good, so there can be no doubt
in the forensical sense about the identities of either party.
This offer is made anonymously so that if Sloan does not wish
to accept its genuineness can be denied. It is made in public
because Sloan considers himself duty bound to publish it, even
if communicated to him privately.
How Sloan obtains the written agreement of Parker is up to him.
This offer won't be open for long, so if Sloan is willing to
bite, he should reply to indicate interest (in principle).
Sloan should not overestimate his position. Dylan Loeb McClain
is a fool and will soon be out of a job - complaints about his
evident prejudice and biases have already been made by many.
What has this to do with jc or his pur****ted resignation? Sloan
can find out if he wishes by hearing the "tape".
%Intermediary%
|
